C&TS specific written standards

I hope someone weighs in here with a clarification of the FRA's request for written track maintenance standards. I did not read PRSL's interpretation into the report of the commission meeting. I took it to mean that the FRA wants something to show how the C&TS as an individual operating railroad assures consistancy when maintaining trackwork within its organization.
This is going on all over the world in every conceivable industry (ISO9000, 9001 etc, etc). Written procedures (also know as SOP's-standard operating procedures or WIP's-work instruction procedures) on how certain critical procedures are performed assures that when Max Pacheco retires and eventually leaves us, the same tried and proven methods that he learned and has used for years will be still used after he is gone. Having spent years in maintenance, I can attest to the problems that arise when some old head retires or dies and takes all the info that was in his head with him. I doubt that the FRA wants the C&TS to "write or develop regs" for the entire NG railroad industry.
I hesitate to put thoughts into somebody's head here, but if any U.S. ng operation should be used as a benchmark for track maintenance standard procedures, I would have to look very hard at the D&S. I am not ruling out the WP&Y either, but I doubt that the FRA would ever consider using just one RR as a basis for an industry-wide standard.
Mark